HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (11) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kucharik, C. J. Articles by Brye, K. R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kucharik, C. J. Articles by Brye, K. R. Agricola Articles by Kucharik, C. J. Articles by Brye, K. R. Related Collections Surface Water Quality Crop Growth and Development Crop Models Nutrient Management Maize Management

Integrated BIosphere Simulator (IBIS) Yield and Nitrate Loss Predictions for Wisconsin Maize Receiving Varied Amounts of Nitrogen Fertilizer

^a Center for Sustainability and the Global Environment (SAGE), Gaylord Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison, 1710 University Avenue, Madison, WI 53726
^b Univ. of Arkansas-Fayetteville, Dep. of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Sciences (CSES), 115 Plant Sciences Building, Fayetteville, AR 72701

View larger version (51K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Schematic of the dynamic ecosystem model IBIS (the Integrated BIosphere Simulator) adapted for agroecosystems.

View larger version (36K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Monthly total precipitation measured at the Arlington (WI) Agricultural Research Station field site for 1995–2000 compared with IBIS simulated drainage at a 1.4-m soil depth for chisel-plowed maize.

View larger version (48K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Results of IBIS simulations showing effects of varied fertilizer N use beginning in 1995 on (b) total soil inorganic N storage in top 1.4 m of soil, (c) annual NO3–N leaching, (d) NO3–N concentration, and (e) maize yield. Part (a) shows annual precipitation used to drive model simulations compared with predicted drainage for the control case (180 kg N ha-1). Maize received 180 kg N ha-1 fertilizer N for years prior to 1995. In (a), the symbol + denotes annual precipitation, and is IBIS predicted drainage at 1.4 m for chisel-plowed N-fertilized maize receiving 180 kg N ha-1. For (b)–(d), * is 234 kg N ha-1, + is 180 kg N ha-1, — is 126 kg N ha-1, is N unfertilized, and x is prairie.

View larger version (35K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Fractional change of (a) annual NO3–N leaching and (b) maize yield normalized by predictions for the control case (180 kg N ha-1) during the 21-yr simulation. The figure legend applies to both (a) and (b).

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. IBIS simulated average maize yield and NO3–N leaching as a function of fertilizer N use on the Plano silt loam soil at the Arlington Agricultural Research Station, Arlington, WI.

View larger version (41K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. IBIS simulated cumulative probabilities of (a) annual NO3–N losses at a 1.4-m soil depth, (b) flow-weighted annual mean NO3–N concentration at a 1.4-m soil depth, and (c) maize yield on the Plano silt loam soil at the Arlington Agricultural Research Station, Arlington, WI. For all figures, * is 234 kg N ha-1, + is 180 kg N ha-1, — is 126 kg N ha-1, and is N unfertilized.

View larger version (30K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. (a) Historical USDA reported average maize yield, (b) the computed 10-yr running average standard error of yield, (c) the 10-yr running average coefficient of variation of yield, and (d) estimated fertilizer N use for Columbia County, Wisconsin. The Arlington Agricultural Research Station is located in the southeastern corner of the county.